GamePro: BioShock vs. Halo 3

It's not easy to choose between two obvious Game of the Year candidates, but in reality, not everyone can afford to buy every game out there. So GamePro poses the question: If you had to choose, would you buy BioShock or Halo 3? GamePro breaks each game down into eight categories to see who emerges victorious.

Both BioShock and Halo 3 are classic shooters and hold up as two of the best games of all time. If you look at the results by category, it's easy to understand. If you're not much of an online gamer, BioShock is your best bet. If you consistently play on Xbox Live, you need Halo 3. But really, the final choice is simple: find the money to buy both.

Bioshock was going against anything except Halo 3 with it's amazing multiplayer it should win hands down. The truth is millions will be playing Halo 3 online for YEARS. I'm not sure about giving Halo 3 the win in the innovation category though. Combat Evolved was important because of it's polish as a FPS on a console and Halo 2 had it's incredible multiplayer. Halo 3 just built on that solid foundation. I think Bioshock almost re-defined the shooter. Just as every online console game is compared to Halo 2 (and now 3) every story driven shooter will now be compared to Bioshock and that's arguably a larger amount of games.

I bought Bioshock and played through it and liked it. But when it's finished it's finished - I didn't see a reason to start the game over again.

But when I finished Halo 3, I've played several of the levels over and over with friends on Xbox Live. I've played with campaign scoring on, making the singleplayer a competetive game, and also the skulls makes things more interesting.

Now Halo 3 also has a brilliant multiplayer making it last years longer than Bioshock (which lasted like a week for me). And I do think that Halo 3 has more innovation cause of things like Forge, Saved Films, File Share and a Bungie.net that you can visit and look for stats, pictures, movies, gametypes etc.

Bioshock has better grapics and sound, but you get way more out of your money if you get Halo 3 cause it's going to be around for years.

I like both games, but I'm just a fan of games with MP.

Edit: And you can't say that "Bioshock or Halo 3 is game of the year", when COD4 and Mass Effect aren't out yet.

Bioshock definately. Halo 3 cant even give gamers a true HD experience and with a bland storyline, what reason is there to play campaign mode? Multiplayer wise, It's only going to get it's praise because of what Halo 2 did for Xbox live. There are much better Multiplayer games coming for 360 and some already out for PS3 such as Resistance.

Call of Duty 4 is the game that will blow Halo a new ass once released.

What's sad is xbots are too fixated on Halo to understand that CoD4 will be better than Halo.

Xbox probably wont get the port of unreal tournament when it's all said and done because PS3 has the perfect market for this game. It will be like Haze, announced for 360 early on but once they realize it cant be ported to 360 it will remain PS3 exclusive.

Unreal Tournament will get 95% praise as game of the year with the only 5% opposing will be the XBots who want PS3 so bad but cant get it.

News FLASH- YOU CAN GET A PS3! JUST TRADE IN YOUR 360 BEFORE IT BREAKS DOWN

It's always amusing to see Sony drones call the kettle black. Furthermore, I'm a Halo fan and I'm still looking forward to games like COD4, UT3 and Haze. I don't even have a PS3 and probably won't for quite some time. In any case, I'm not worried about these games being "Halo killers" because Halo stands on its own. COD and UT play completely different from Halo. It's a matter of preference. To say one's better than the other is dumb.

I loved Bioshock. It's one of the greatest game to hit 360. So as far as overall first time experience, my vote would have to go to Bioshock.

But Halo has the longevity and replay factor that gamers such as myself look for. Once I beat Bioshock, I never played it since. Halo has very simple and addictive multiplayer which adds a different experience every time you turn the game on.

Weighing in on both factors, I would have to rule this one a tie. I'd rather just enjoy the games instead of debating with myself on which is better.

One of the great things about the campaign portion of Halo 3 is that there are a number of different ways to play it. You can play it on your own. You can play it with up to 3 other friends. You can turn scoring on and make a competitive game out of it. You can make all kinds of crazy alterations to the experience by using skulls found in the game. Yeah, the overall package is still "Halo," but we couldn't do these things in Halo 1 or Halo 2. Not to mention the multiplayer is improved over 2 and will be played for years, just like the previous versions before it. As for innovation, you have the file share feature and forge editor. As far as console shooters are concerned, I'd say that's a first. And I'm not talking about PC games. Console games. Bioshock is not really fresh experience. Its a basic 1st person shooter with a nice coat of paint and an engaging story. You take out the plasmids and you basically have Doom 3. In the end, both are great games. But Bioshock's lack of multiplayer just means that a year from now it will be collecting dust on the shelf while Halo 3 still gets play on past 2009. There is just more to do with Halo 3 than there is in Bioshock. The sad thing is, neither of these games will probably win game of the year. Uncharted, Mass Effect, Rock Band, and The Orange Box all look primed to make an impact.

As much as I would like to think Uncharted has a chance for GoY, it wont. For the simple fact that it's only on the Playstation 3. As of right now, common media practice is to downplay any great game released on the PS3 platform. So I expect this get an average of 85%. Critics will downplay the solid gameplay and overexaggerate a minor flaw that will be found in the game.

However, Uncharted has a very good possibility for being GoY in my own mind and that's the only thing that counts.

Bioshock does have better graphics but the environments are much smaller than HALO's. Also, the water in HALO is better because you can see the ripple in the water when a vehicle or something goes in it.

As far as game of the year, COD 4 has no co-op (in an army game-FPS thats inexcusable).

MASS EFFECT, Im buying it, but I have no idea has a chance, it needs to be better than OBLIVION to do so.

I think HALO 3 has to many options to lose game of the year to anything and I have yet to play the multiplayer.

I'd have to give my vote to BioShock. I didnt get around to buying BioShock until the day Halo 3 was released so I got them together. I played Halo 3 first, obviously because of all the hype surrounding it. Played for a few hours, got bored, put in Bioshock and Halo 3 hadnt seen the inside of my 360 until after I completed Bioshock, so that has to say something. I'd give Bioshock the vote over Halo on all the categories there except multiplayer, obviously, and possibly controls. Strange to see him giving Halo the winner in the arsenal category, he obviously wasn't taking the Plasmids into account, and innovation?!?! Real shame theres no multiplayer in Bioshock though.

playing Bioshock and Halo 3 at the same time would force you to choose Bioshock. I mean, Bioshock is BASED around its single-player and, hence, it basically kills Halo 3 in that department.

But give it 2 weeks and you will find yourself ejecting the Big Daddy back into its green, plastic shelter. Soon, you will realize that Halo 3's combination of SP AND MP is enough to keep you playing for months and months to come (unless, of course, you do not have X-live).

Edit:

So you'll be playing Gear MP? If you play the Gears MP why not just play the Halo 3 MP, man. It doesn't matter though, you got your own way- I'll let you stick to it.

...... and yeah, well that is the problem with Bioshock alright, the lack of MP. But I'll have to say, I think Bungie made a number of c0ck ups on the MP. This whole matchmaking thing is nothing but a pain in the arse. If I want to just jump into a CTF game at anytime, I should be able to, and to not have to be forced to play these random games that everyone keeps trying to veto. Considering Halos success is in the MP, I cant understand why Bungie would put this huge limitation in there. For someone that doesn't know a lot of people with their own 360's, ie: me, the MP kinda sucks to be honest, because you never really get to play what you want. To not be able to search for and join custom games in whats regarded as the best MP game out there is just a bit ridiculous in my eyes. Thats another reason why my vote goes to Bioshock, and also why I'll probably be brushing the dust off Gears of War sooner than I thought.